Skip to comments.We Are All in It Together, Clinton Says [Shared Prosperity Should Replace "On Your Own' Society"]
Posted on 05/29/2007 9:13:29 AM PDT by HarmlessLovableFuzzball
click here to read article
You wouldn’t know how to win a campaign to save your life.
And pandering to rino idiots is not how to beat ratz.
I think you are on the wrong forum.
On your own society also means
government out of my business society.
this means hillary is advocating the government in you personal affairs society.
Price of gas, smokes, cable TV, etc...folks in fly-over see their bills rise and are ready for a change...
In other words the highly taxed and regulated segments on the economy, that is the ones the government has most control over (gas, smokes, cable TV) are rising fast. Meanwhile the less regulated parts of the economy prices are down, or amazingly have gone to zero.
First Hotmail and a few other web services provided something that used to cost hundreds of dollars a year for nothing. (BTW: lots of third world people without computers still have hotmail or yahoo accounts). Now we have free photo-sharing, free web hosting, free home-pages, etc.
The only part of the free market economy where the government isn't a big factor but inflation adjusted prices aren't falling is entertainment.
So, having observed this interesting contrast 'fly-over' voters are going to elect self-avowed socialists who will work to make more and more of the economy resemble the overtaxed tabacco and gasoline segments.
I thought the heartland was too smart to get suckered by a bunch of fast talking New Yorkers like Hillary and Rudy.
“There is a lot of anger outside FR and the Beltway over economic factors right now, and to ignore it and just sling names at the opposition is a big loser.”
“What economic factors? “
Low unemployment. High productivity. The stock market at all-time highs. The fact that you can get a 50” color TV at an affordable price. Stuff like that.
“Yep, good reason to be angry about our economy (rolling eyes). /s”
Actually, I think the media trolls for ‘malaise’ and the general insecurity people have in our dynamic, global economy makes many feel that their std of living could slip away.
Even though we are better off now than ever.
I’d rather be right and lose than be wrong and win . . . and catering to the whims of idiotic voters is a losing proposition in the long run.
She is attempting to overshadow her war votes. She has also revealed herself for what we have known for years. If America buys into this and if the amnesty deal goes through, we’re done.
He should get the new Donzi Hybrid. :^)
The harder I worked the more “fair” the world has always been to me.
That’s got to be the funniest thing I’ve EVER read. This comes from the family whose middle name is GREED. Is she going to set an example by sharing her wealth? Didn’t think so. Remember the tax deduction for used underwear. Probably all the sharing they’ll do.
They won’t be going back to Arkansas any time soon. Arkensas is not big enough for their egos. Face it new York; you’re stuck with them.
“Id rather be right and lose than be wrong and win..”
Oh, so you are one of the voters who stayed home during the last congressional race, eh?
She what that got us?
Unfortunately, during the transition period, you will be paired with a very talented would-be musician who presently lives in the inner-city of Philadelphia and wears his pants around his knees. He has had access to your accounts and assets since yesterday as you have had access to his. Though actually, he has no assets or accounts.
Please keep us posted as to how things are going. Your joint prosperity will act as an inspiration to all of us who have had our doubts about Hillary's wisdom.
I must be screwed up. I never read the government policy on what’s fair or unjust. Am I going to jail?
“You wouldnt know how to win a campaign to save your life.”
That is truly funny.
Does this mean I must "share" my spare bedroom with an
illegal alien Z-visa worker rather than make him live in a crummy 3 bedroom trailer bunked up with 30 others?
If not, why not? That would surely qualify as being "all in it together", wouldn't it? Isn't my empty bedroom a "special privilege" sitting empty while others can use it - especially as we will need the extra unused room for another 100 million
criminal invaders, um, slaves, uh, new voters?
Share? The Clinton’s have made millions, what do they intend to share that is theirs? I’m sorry I can’t read all the comments. My blood pressure goes up just by seeing her name.
It plays very well in today’s age. Very few people seem to understand simple economics anymore and the media has really done their part in ignoring how great our economy is performing. The only time you hear anything on the economy anymore is rising gas prices, housing problems, and “inequality”. And if this is brought up in a debate, Klintoon will scream about only the rich getting richer and oil profits that bankrupt the American people. I never believed our country could be destroyed from within, but its starting to look that way.
Let me see if I understand the stupidity.
We have a red hot economy on our hands. The ratz and slugs of the MSM have blown fart gas mightily to say that its bad.
So, instead of defeating that lie, we should embrace the lie, and tell stupid voters how we are going to fix this bad economy, that’s really a good economy, so that we can get those ignoramuses to vote for us.
So, the ends justifies the means (only a liberal believe that) and we just simply have to lie to the constituency to win elections.
Let me tell you what: I’ve been a republican trench worker for 40 years. Any imbecile who thinks you need to embrace a lie in order to win, is a fool and a charlatan and will end up in flames.
Boy ain’t that the truth.
Mugabe in Zimbabwe agrees with the Beast!
You’re Are All in It Together, Clinton Says (but I’m in it for myself)
By John Solomon and Matthew Mosk
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, February 23, 2007; A01
Former president Bill Clinton, who came to the White House with modest means and left deeply in debt, has collected nearly $40 million in speaking fees over the past six years, according to interviews and financial disclosure statements filed by his wife, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.).
Last year, one of his most lucrative since he left the presidency, Clinton earned $9 million to $10 million on the lecture circuit. He averaged almost a speech a day — 352 for the year — but only about 20 percent were for personal income. The others were given for no fee or for donations to the William J. Clinton Foundation, the nonprofit group he founded to pursue causes such as the fight against AIDS.
His paid speeches included $150,000 appearances before landlord groups, biotechnology firms and food distributors, as well as speeches in England, Ireland, New Zealand and Australia that together netted him more than $1.6 million. On one particularly good day in Canada, Clinton made $475,000 for two speeches, more than double his annual salary as president.
“I never had a nickel to my name until I got out of the White House, and now I’m a millionaire, the most favored person for the Washington Republicans,” Clinton told a friendly audience in Kentucky last fall. “I get a tax cut every year, no matter what our needs are.”
Indeed, the Clintons — who left the White House with an estimated $12 million in legal debts rung up during the Whitewater, campaign fundraising and Monica S. Lewinsky investigations — are worth an estimated $10 million to $50 million, according to Hillary Clinton’s most recent disclosure form. That is attributable primarily to the speaking fees and to the seven-figure book deals that both Clintons signed shortly after leaving the White House.
The fortune they have amassed gives the Clintons a nest egg for the first time, and it allows them to tap into that wealth for a campaign if Hillary Clinton, as expected, forgoes public financing in her race for president. It also suggests a sometimes close connection between their personal finances and her political career.
Many of Bill Clinton’s six-figure speeches have been made to companies whose employees and political action committees have been among Hillary Clinton’s top backers in her Senate campaigns. The New York investment giant Goldman Sachs paid him $650,000 for four speeches in recent years. Its employees and PAC have given her $270,000 since 2000 — putting it second on the list of her most generous political patrons.
The banking firm Citigroup, whose employees and PAC have been Hillary Clinton’s top source of campaign donations, with more than $320,000, paid her husband $250,000 for a speech in France in 2004. Last year, it committed $5.5 million for Clinton’s Global Initiative to help encourage entrepreneurship and financial education among the poor.
Asked about the companies and their relationship to the Clintons, Jay Carson, a spokesman for the former president, said, “It certainly makes sense that reputable New York companies who support the policies and works of President Clinton and his foundation would also be supportive of their senator.”
Well, it’s out in the open now...
You hit the nail on the head.
Liberals/Democrats are just socialist,Marxist communists.
You think liberals would have figured out that socialism and government planning doesn’t work.
Hillary is a typical democrat/liberal.
Bill Clinton never misses an opportunity to say [ Begin low , raspy voice] "You know Ah didn't need President Bush's tax cuts... [End low, raspy voice].
Every opportunity he gets, he lets people know he has made money. And you can bet like John Kerry, he will go to any length to make sure his taxable income and tax rate is the lowest possible. I read Kerry paid 8.25%
"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." -Hillary Rodham Clinton, 6/28/04
"Shared Prosperity Should Replace On Your Own' Society." -Hillary Rodham Clinton, 5/29/07
The socialist Hilabeast knows what we peons need.
Hillary’s communist manifesto....... what’s yours is mine and I’ll take it.
Hillderbeast is Queen of dimCommunist party
I meant 12.8 %, not 8.5 %
I went to the voting booth and cast my votes for the most conservative candidates in every race. Most of my candidates won, too.
Yeah yeah, I know, Hill: “Socialism just hasn’t been tried by the right people yet!”
I'm all for togetherness, sharing and other assorted happy thoughts. However, I expect that I get to freely choose the company I wish to be 'together and share' with.
But there are MILLIONS of people who eat crackers, obviously!! Unbelievable. It astounds me that the Hollywood elite will say she’s being “misunderstood”
and defend her as the answer to our problems and our
great American Hero since Lincoln.
She is definitely one French fry short of a Happy Meal.
hair standing straight up, thank you. and my skin crawling as well.
it is FAR from funny, my friend. This should scare the crap out of every single citizen of this country. She is closer to the WH than we want to believe...unless WE DO SOMETHING!
you have too many cats. give me one.
wait, I hate cats. forget it.
“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened.” - Norman Thomas, Socialist Party presidential candidate 1936-1968, co-founder of the American Civil Liberties Union
We're the only beacon of freedom in the world and they're trying to destroy us.
should Socialists like Hillary be given amnesty?
One, in actuality we all work for the government, government stopped working for us. Two, the Democratic Party's raison d'etre is special privileges for 'special' groups, which is in direct confrontation with what she said.
“She is aiming straight for the kook base that’s drifting toward Obama.”
Actually probably aimed more at the Edwards supporters.
....and the battle for the middle class now begins. Looks like she’s doing an end around the 2 party system......
Since we’re all in it together, can I have some of the money back that I give for public schools which I refuse to send my children to?